Topic: [350 GH/s] "Eligius" (experimental) pool: almost feeless PPS, hoppers welcome - page 11. (Read 116938 times)

Wow, nyargh is stupid and snarky.  Hilarious combination.

Protip: The only way to get and keep 100% of your earnings is to solo mine.  People that mine in pools accept a certain tradeoff.  Luke-Jr's implementation is better than most, on average, if you actually did do the math.

I like people that pick only a few words of information and preach it ad nausea while declaring themselves the most clever.  They're fun.

Keep it classy, Luke.  You have just developed a great way to rip off your contributors who are bad at math.  If your reward is always 'carried forward', you will never be paid in full.  How is this a hard concept to grasp?

So it seems.

In other news - mine for infinity.  Check.

That was in my long term plans, anyway....

Perhaps my mistake was using English words for technical details...

If you miss a round or stop mining, you will never receive your past earnings.  Basically for this to be "fair" you have to mine non-stop forever.

I missed your point... what was the problem with this?

No, the only way to get 100% of your earnings is to mine for infinity.  The only way for this system to be fair is to decay old shares in a single round like Slush's pool attempts to do, otherwise you will never get your fair payout as there will always be something held over.

Would it make more sense to give it some time before you try to redesign something?

The 95% rule would suck - I have a dedicated miner on St. Eligius, but it has a tendency to go down sometimes.... surely the uptime is more than 90% but probably not 95.  Not to mention recent storms and random acts of electricity have outed my internet service and/or power.

So ya - thumbs down.

And I'm kicking myself that I missed the payout poll - I would've voted +1 for keeping the 1.0 BTC payout.

Perhaps I'm missing something here, because I'm not entirely thrilled with this system.

As I understand it, there is an upper limit on payouts to prevent miners from statistically profiting from pool hopping. However, the value you've earned beyond this upper limit is banked by the pool and used to pay out more on longer blocks.

Does this mean that the only way to fully drain 100% of your mining earnings from the pool is if the pool encounters a string of long blocks, forcing the pool to pay out your 'banked' earnings?

In other words, if the pool is lucky (lots of short blocks) then the pool limits payouts and holds the profits. If the pool is unlucky, then you can be paid out for your actual earnings. This limits the miners' upside and only gives you your total earnings if the pool is unlucky anyway.

I guess my concern stems from the fact that there is an upper limit to your payouts, but no lower limit. And the only way to completely drain your earnings from the pool is to wait for a string of long blocks to drain your 'banked' balance and then quit mining.

Are you going to pay out this 'banked' balance after a certain period of inactivity, or do you keep it for the pool/yourself?



Wouldn't it make more sense to only force this system on miners who aren't mining for 100% (or 95% to account for connection problems, etc.) of the duration of the last x number of blocks?

Yes, it's crap right now because the US pool was very lucky. But it's not going to persist, and you'll be happy to know that you'll be paid more than you should be paid when the pool is unlucky

Actually, maybe.... I did ban at least China a while back from my personal webserver (which happens to run USA for now).

Getting less than 20% of my share for the last two block is real crap.
If block are found faster than average, the contributors should be rewarded accordingly.
I.E. Earnings should dominate.
If you want some cap, value shouldn't be set so restrictive to the average payout, as it is, but to maybe twice the average. This way the pool can still gouge the theoretical hoppers to some extent, but isn't punishing those who consistently stay in on all rounds.

To summarize - If (Shares x 50 / difficulty) is the average reward for average rounds, then the value cap should be set to more, maybe (shares x 100/difficulty) or even just 10% more. This will allow earnings to dominate over the long run for loyal users and not punish them if blocks are consistently found about 10% faster.

The current estimate grows over time (this is expected for PPS). It looks nice and I like it.

Maybe some countries are banned? Or too huge IP ranges...

The statistical data isn't updated yet, so Artefact2 will just show you what you'd actually get if we found a block at this instant. When the upgrade is complete, it will look nicer.

is it working? I can't connect with anything...

getting "Problems communicating with bitcoin RPC" with poclbm and 0 rate with phoenix.

So is this reflected in the artefact2 status pages/graphs?

After reading the Wiki Page a couple of times I think i begin understanding the concept

Though, getting 0.008 for the same %contribution instead of ~0.11 is a hit in the face at first glance ^^

Anyways, let's see how that will work out

Again, the concept of the new payout system: Maximum PPS

Unfortunately, we found 2 very short blocks just now, so it's looking "ugly" to some folks who don't get the concept. Basically, while you were just paid 1/4 and 1/8 less than you would have gotten under the old system, when those "ugh, no block all day" blocks hit, you'll get reimbursed for these short ones. Doing it this way eliminates the benefits of pool hopping.

Also note that only USA is on the new system for now. If you want to use the old system for any reason, you can still mine on the Europe pool.

Thank you for doing that. Especially the last part.